You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.
Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline800-272-390024 hours a day, 365 days a yearFree, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline98824/7Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline866-232-84849:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a weekLicensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat.Text: 646-586-5283
In a medical emergency, call 911.
More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.
Research
28,180 Alzheimer's and dementia studies in plain English, each scored out of 100.
Find studies
Showing 21,176–21,200 of 27,146 studies marked Peer-reviewed(page 848 of 1086)· 28,180 in the whole library·How the 0–100 score works
Download bibliography of the first 500 of these studies, in this order: BibTeX (.bib) · RIS (.ris)
From OpenAlex; 13,658 studies have no institution on record and are not counted here.
A note on reading research. One study is rarely the final word.
We try to note the size of a study, whether it was in humans or animals, and how early-stage the finding is. If a summary here doesn't make that clear, treat it with extra caution and check the original source.
On November 3, 1906, a clinical psychiatrist and neuroanatomist, Alois Alzheimer, reported "A peculiar severe disease process of the cerebral cortex" to the 37th Meeting of South-West German Psychiatrists in Tubingen, He described a 50-year-old woman whom he had followed from her admission for paranoia, progressive sleep and memory disturbance, aggression, and confusion, until her death 5 years later. 4 key findings →
Accurate and rapid identification of perturbed pathways through the analysis of genome-wide expression profiles facilitates the generation of biological hypotheses. 2 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·Biochemistry·2007-11-01
The 37-residue amylin peptide, also known as islet amyloid polypeptide, forms fibrils that are the main peptide or protein component of amyloid that develops in the pancreas of type 2 diabetes patients. 1 key finding →
Beta-amyloid (Abeta) 1-42, implicated in the pathogenesis of Alzheimer's disease, forms an oligomeric complex that binds copper at a CuZn superoxide dismutase-like binding site. 5 key findings →
Glycogen synthase kinase 3 (GSK3) is a serine/threonine kinase that has been implicated in pathological conditions such as diabetes and Alzheimer's disease. 2 key findings →
Studies have shown that bilingual individuals consistently outperform their monolingual counterparts on tasks involving executive control. 1 key finding →
Acetyl- and butyryl-cholinesterase activities have been measured biochemically in normal brain tissue, in senile dementia of Alzheimer type and in mental disorders without Alzheimer-type abnormalities. 3 key findings →
Cognitive dysfunction is a major health problem in the 21st century, and many neuropsychiatric disorders and neurodegenerative disorders, such as schizophrenia, depression, Alzheimer's Disease dementia, cerebrovascular impairment, seizure disorders, head injury and Parkinsonism, can be severly functionally debilitating in nature. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·PubMed·2000-10-01
The objectives of the study were (1) to determine whether concentrations of particles in the ambient air of Montreal, Quebec, were associated with daily all-cause and cause-specific mortality in the period 1984 to 1993, and (2) to determine whether groups of the population had higher than average risks of death from exposure to particles. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·ACS Sensors·2021-01-27
Butyrylcholinesterase (BChE) is an essential human cholinesterase relevant to liver conditions and neurodegenerative diseases, which makes it a pivotal biomarker of health. 5 key findings →
✓ Peer-reviewedalzhub usefulness score 40 out of 100.·PLANT PHYSIOLOGY·2010-10-01
For example, the early advances in floral genetics were primarily the result of the ease of screening for mutations impacting flavonoid-derived flower colors, and the first demonstration of epigenetic gene silencing in plants was likewise associated with flavonoid biosynthesis (Jorgensen, 1995). 5 key findings →
Presenile Dementia or Early Onset Dementia (EOD) is a public health problem, it differs from Senile Dementia, and encloses a significant number of cases; nevertheless, it is still poorly understood and underdiagnosed. 1 key finding →
Frozen brain specimens from patients with multiple sclerosis (MS) and other neurologic diseases were analyzed using immunocytochemical techniques for the presence of TNF. 3 key findings →
The contribution of inflammation to the progression of neurodegenerative diseases such as Alzheimer's, Parkinson's, and prion diseases is poorly understood. 1 key finding →
While peripheral immune access to the central nervous system (CNS) is restricted and tightly controlled, the CNS is capable of dynamic immune and inflammatory responses to a variety of insults. 1 key finding →
Multiple sclerosis (MS) brain tissue, spleen, and PBMC were studied using immunocytochemistry and FACS for immunoreactivity for lymphotoxin (LT) and TNF. 3 key findings →
Reactive microglia associated with the beta-amyloid plaques in Alzheimer's disease (AD) brains initiate a sequence of inflammatory events integral to the disease process. 3 key findings →
Free full text links and the Full text may need a subscription
label come from Unpaywall, Europe PMC and OpenAlex records of free copies, checked 10 Oct 2026. A study with neither is unknown, not paywalled.
Show only studies that are free to read
How the 0–100 score works — and why some entries are capped
This is alzhub's own score. It is not an official metric, not an impact factor,
and no journal, publisher or ranking body endorses it. We built it so that a reader who is not a
scientist can tell a landmark trial from a conference abstract without having to already know the
difference. Every point comes from one of 20 components, all of them printed on the study itself,
so you can disagree with our arithmetic rather than having to trust the total.
Journal tierup to 10 pts
Journal's citation recordup to 4 pts
Study designup to 12 pts
Strength of evidenceup to 5 pts
Peer-review validationup to 10 pts
How recentup to 5 pts
Sample sizeup to 4 pts
Effect reportedup to 3 pts
Studied in peopleup to 3 pts
Randomised / blindedup to 2 pts
Times citedup to 7 pts
Citations per yearup to 5 pts
Impact for its field and yearup to 6 pts
Cited by studies hereup to 6 pts
Still being citedup to 4 pts
Senior author's track recordup to 4 pts
Institution's track recordup to 3 pts
Multi-centre collaborationup to 3 pts
Indexed in PubMedup to 2 pts
Free to readup to 2 pts
Journals are placed in ordered tiers, never given a numeric impact factor — we
could not verify current impact factors from a source we control, and an invented one would be
worse than none. Tier 1 is the top-tier general journals (NEJM, The Lancet, JAMA, Nature, Science,
Nature Medicine); tier 2 is the leading specialty journals; tier 3 is every other peer-reviewed
journal. A separate part scores how much the journal's own papers are cited, which tells the
tier-3 journals apart.
Two rules we don't bend. First, we never fill in a
missing value: if a record does not state a sample size or a design, that component scores
zero, and if we simply have no data for a part, such as a citation count, that part is left out and
the study is scored on the parts we could check. The study card says which. Second, anything that is not a peer-reviewed
article is capped at 16/100 and carries a warning chip — so a conference abstract or
a company press release can never outrank a peer-reviewed paper, no matter how good it looks.
We rank a rigorous null result — a good trial showing that something does not
work — above an early positive finding. Someone deciding whether to buy a supplement is served by
that, and the rigour is already counted by the design and journal components.
The score is computed from the published data alone and is
reproducible: the same file always yields the same numbers.
See the whole rubric drawn out →
— four charts covering all 28,180 studies: how the scores are spread and where the cap
bites, which of the 20 components the library is strong and weak on, which subjects rest on
stronger evidence, and what kinds of study each subject is actually built from.
What this library is — and isn't
This is a large sample of the Alzheimer's literature, not an exhaustive index of
it. It holds 28,180 records, built mostly from automated pulls of Europe PMC
(61.7% of the library) and OpenAlex (18.1%),
plus smaller pulls from PubMed, Crossref and medRxiv. If a study, a drug, or a finding isn't here,
that is not evidence it doesn't exist in the literature — it may simply not have been pulled in yet.
1,034 records (3.7% of the
library) are not peer-reviewed — 962 of those are preprints posted before any
journal review, and the rest are conference abstracts, regulatory notices and reports. Every study card
on this page states its status plainly, and the score above is capped for anything that isn't a
peer-reviewed article.